 |
|
The core of the legal battle revolves around the Waqf (Amendment) Act of 2025 and its potential impact on the religious freedoms of the Muslim community in India. The Centre's argument before the Supreme Court directly challenges the perception that creating a waqf is an indispensable religious duty for Muslims. By asserting that 'charity is not an essential part of any religion,' the Centre aims to weaken the petitioners' claim that the Act infringes upon their fundamental religious rights. This assertion is based on the premise that while charity holds significance in various religions, it doesn't constitute a mandatory or essential element that defines one's adherence to a particular faith. The government's position hinges on distinguishing between religious practices that are integral to the faith and those that, while commendable, are not absolutely necessary. To solidify this argument, the Centre explicitly stated that a Muslim who does not create a waqf would not be deemed any less of a Muslim, implying that waqf creation is more of a voluntary act of charity than a mandatory religious obligation. Furthermore, the Solicitor General emphasized that the Waqf (Amendment) Act primarily addresses the secular and administrative dimensions of Waqf institutions, ensuring transparency and accountability without encroaching upon the core religious beliefs and practices of Islam. This distinction aims to shield the law from accusations of religious interference, framing it instead as a measure to regulate the financial and administrative aspects of Waqf properties. The Act's focus on mandatory registration and the curbing of 'waqf by user' are presented as means to combat encroachments and mismanagement, issues that, according to the Centre, have been raised by members of the Muslim community themselves. The government also cites analogous examples from Hindu law, where various customs and practices have been altered or abolished over time through legislative action, suggesting that such interventions are not unprecedented and should not be viewed as an infringement on religious freedom. Overall, the Centre's defense rests on the argument that the Waqf (Amendment) Act is a necessary step to modernize and regulate Waqf institutions, ensuring transparency and preventing abuses, while simultaneously upholding the fundamental religious rights of the Muslim community.
The government's defense of the Waqf (Amendment) Act also relies heavily on the principle of state regulation of secular activities related to religion. Drawing upon Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution, the Solicitor General argued that the state has the authority to regulate financial management and property administration of religious endowments to ensure transparency and prevent mismanagement. This argument hinges on the distinction between religious practices and the secular activities that surround them, asserting that the state's intervention is limited to the latter and does not impinge upon the former. The government's focus on transparency and accountability is presented as a legitimate exercise of its regulatory power, aimed at safeguarding the interests of the community and preventing abuses of power. The issue of 'waqf by user' is also addressed by the Solicitor General, who argued that this practice was only given statutory recognition by previous Waqf Acts and is not an inherent right. Therefore, the government contends that what was created by legislative policy can also be taken away by legislative action, especially considering societal needs and changing circumstances. This perspective views the Act as a legitimate exercise of legislative power to adapt to evolving societal conditions and address existing problems related to waqf management. The Solicitor General also addressed concerns about the composition of State Waqf Boards and the Central Waqf Council, which the Act expands to include a small number of non-Muslim members. The government argues that this is not an encroachment but rather a means to ensure broader representation and diversity in waqf property management. The Joint Parliamentary Committee's conclusion is cited to support this assertion, suggesting that the inclusion of non-Muslim members would bring diverse perspectives and expertise to the management of waqf properties.
Furthermore, the government refuted allegations that the Act would lead to the cessation of religious activities in protected monuments. The Solicitor General clarified that Section 3D of the Act only prevents activities inconsistent with the identity of the monument, ensuring that if the area was used for religious purposes, it would continue to be used for that purpose. This clarification aims to alleviate concerns that the Act would stifle religious expression or alter the historical character of waqf properties. On the issue of tribal or scheduled lands, the Solicitor General argued that the Act's prohibition on creating waqfs out of these lands is consistent with the Constitution's protection of these lands and communities. This argument highlights the government's commitment to safeguarding the rights and interests of vulnerable communities and preventing the misuse of tribal or scheduled lands for religious purposes. The government's overall defense of the Waqf (Amendment) Act rests on a complex interplay of legal and policy considerations. It argues that the Act is a necessary step to modernize and regulate Waqf institutions, ensuring transparency and preventing abuses, while simultaneously upholding the fundamental religious rights of the Muslim community. The government's reliance on the principle of state regulation of secular activities related to religion, coupled with its focus on transparency and accountability, aims to portray the Act as a legitimate exercise of its regulatory power. The Act, in essence, is portrayed as a necessary intervention to address historical issues, prevent abuses, and promote the efficient management of Waqf properties, ultimately benefiting the community they serve. The arguments presented by the Centre on May 21, 2025, are aimed at convincing the Supreme Court that the Waqf (Amendment) Act is a valid and necessary piece of legislation that does not infringe upon the religious rights of the Muslim community. The upcoming proceedings on May 22 will likely provide further insights into the perspectives of the petitioners and the Supreme Court's evaluation of the arguments presented by both sides.
The government also addressed the issue of encroachments on public land by waqfs, emphasizing its duty to protect public property held in trust for the people. It argued that the mandatory registration of waqfs is meant to bring them under a regulatory framework that facilitates audit, increases documentation, and formalizes waqf management. This is intended to ensure responsible management and prevent illegal activities. Regarding concerns about government servants investigating waqf properties, the Solicitor General dismissed the argument that this would be a conflict of interest, asserting that the government functions through its officers, and personal bias must be proven to invalidate their actions. Additionally, he highlighted the availability of appeals to specialized tribunals, High Courts, and the Supreme Court to ensure fairness and redress grievances. In essence, the government aims to portray the Act as a comprehensive framework that addresses various issues related to waqf management, from registration and transparency to encroachments and the protection of public land. The inclusion of non-Muslims in Waqf Boards and Councils is presented as a measure to ensure broader representation and diversity, while the protection of tribal and scheduled lands is aligned with constitutional safeguards. By addressing these specific concerns and providing clarifications, the government seeks to demonstrate that the Act is not intended to undermine religious freedom but rather to improve the administration and management of Waqf properties in a fair and transparent manner. The ongoing legal challenge will ultimately determine whether the Supreme Court accepts the government's arguments and upholds the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act of 2025. The outcome will have significant implications for the management of waqf properties and the balance between religious freedom and state regulation in India.
The debate surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Act of 2025 highlights the complex interplay between religious freedom, state regulation, and the administration of religious institutions in India. The Centre's argument that creating a waqf is not an essential religious practice reflects a broader debate about the definition of religious freedom and the extent to which the state can regulate religious activities. The government's reliance on Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution underscores the importance of balancing religious rights with the state's responsibility to maintain public order, morality, and health. The specific issues raised in the case, such as the validity of 'waqf by user,' the composition of Waqf Boards and Councils, and the protection of tribal and scheduled lands, demonstrate the diverse range of interests and concerns that are at stake. The outcome of the legal challenge will have far-reaching implications for the management of waqf properties and the relationship between the state and religious institutions in India. It is crucial that the Supreme Court carefully considers the arguments presented by both sides and strikes a balance that protects religious freedom while also ensuring transparency, accountability, and the responsible management of Waqf properties. The ongoing legal proceedings serve as a reminder of the importance of upholding constitutional principles and safeguarding the rights of all citizens, while also addressing legitimate concerns about the administration and management of religious institutions. The ultimate resolution of this case will have a significant impact on the legal and social landscape of India and will shape the future of waqf management in the country.
Source: Creation of waqfs is not an essential religious practice of Islam: Centre